Skip to main content

About your Search

20121222
20121230
STATION
CSPAN 28
LANGUAGE
English 28
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)
and challenges you confront. in this job, i have tried to be as accessible as i can to the pentagon press corps to engage regularly with reporters and to encourage other senior officials in the department to do the same. it is an especially important time to communicate our vision and our priorities as a department. as i have said time and time again over this past year, i believe that we are at a strategic turning point. after more than a decade of war, the longest extended period of conflict in the history of the united states. at the beginning of 2012, president obama and the military and civilian leaders of the department came together to publicly release a new defense strategy. it was designed to help the military affectively navigate this turning point and prepare for the future. under that strategy, our goal was to reshape the force of the 21st century. to try to meet the new security challenges that we are confronted in this world and try to help the country at the same time reduce the deficits which are confronting. we were handed a number and the budget control act to reduce the defen
>> did the pentagon have review? >> no, didn't have fop once i'm retired from active due any i don't have to submit it to the pentagon unless i use classified information. so i avoided using any classified information but a lot of stuff was declassified right after the war. a lot of stuff was a matter of public record. so i had a great deal of material. the best thing i had was this, any war i ever fought most of instructions were sent by message back and forth. so you have hard copy record of every decision made. because of where we are today most of the orders and instructions are seventh back and forth by secured telephone. it became apparent that we're not going have a record of the decisions made unless we have a record ourselves. any time i had a conversation i wrote down what i said and what is being said to me. i had someone in there who would write down every time i made a decision and he would log it into a private journal that we kept of every decision that was happening during the war. if it had not been through that the book would not be written. >> where are those 3,0
security posture. interagency teams give particular scrutiny to high threat posed. the pentagon agreed to dispatch additional marines to post around the world. we asked congress for funds to hire new diplomatic security personnel. we're updating our diplomat procedures to increase the number of experienced and well- trained staffs serving at those posts. tom and i will be discussing all this work and more with congress tomorrow. for now, let me make one other point. i have been a proud member of the foreign service for more than 30 years. i've had the honor of serving as a chief of mission overseas. i know that diplomacy by its very nature must sometimes be practiced in dangerous places. chris stevens understood that our diplomats may not work in bunkers and do their jobs. it is important to recognize that our colleagues in the bureau's of diplomatic security at home and abroad did it right countless times a day for years on end. but we have learned some very hard and painful lessons benghazi. we're already acting on them. we have to do more to constantly improve, reduce the risks that
the wall street journal, or the pentagon indicated they wanted to maintain 6000 to 15th thousand u.s. troops following 2014. that is the issue under discussion now. there's approximately around 340 0,000 afghan security forces in place, including the police. the pentagon recently indicated i don't believe there was a major unit capable of operating independently from nato support. there was some manipulation of the metrics they were using where the things appear to be making more progress than perhaps they were. that came out in a white paper. what will be the long term success or failure of the afghan national security forces is yet to be determined. they need about $4.1 billion a year to continue at that level, which is more than the entire government revenues in afghanistan. so it's gone to take a long-term commitment of foreign powers to maintain that size of armed forces. the afghans have proven that they are excellent fighters. the question is will they be excellent soldiers for the government of afghanistan? host: one other question, how stable do you think the karzai govern
of washington. many communication networks were not operable. when the pentagon was hit and the capitol was evacuated, my staff and i walked to my home on capitol hill. the husband of my office manager work in a section of the pentagon that had been hit. we were on the one phone that we had an call the hospitals, police, anyone that we thought might be able to tell us if he was safe. thankfully, he was fine. but there were so many who waited for hours and called hospitals to hear from their loved ones. sometimes the news was a relief and sometimes they waited in vain for good news. i have to say that it was an incredible moment when the senators who could find each other wherever they had gone from the capital, we finally gathered in the capitol police headquarters to talk to our leaders who had been taken to an undisclosed location. they said, we do not want anyone to come, but we are going to the steps of the capitol to hold a press conference. we do not want anyone there because we do not know who is safe, but we want to tell the press that we are going to open for business tomorrow
and many communications networks were iin-- were inoperable. so when the pentagon was hit and the capitol was evacuated, my staff and i walked one block to my home on capitol hill, just as an ark example, the husband of y office manager worked in the section of the pentagon that had been hit. so we were on the phone -- the one phone that we had -- to hospitals, the police, to anyone that we thought might be able to tell us if he was safe. thankfully, he was fine. but ther were so many who waited for hours, who called hospitals to hear from their loved ones. sometimes the news was a relief, and sometimes they waited in vain for good news. and i have to say that it was an incredible moment when the senators who could find each other wherever they had gone from the capitol, we finally gathered early -- well, late afternoon in the capitol police headquarters to talk to our leaders, who had been taken to an undisclosed location. and they said, we don't want anyone to come, but we are going to the steps of the capitol to hold a press conference. we don't want anyone there because we don't know
their budgets cut, depending whether it the pentagon or other agencies. the agencies can try to shield some programs for others. social security benefits are not going to be cut. the pay for pentagon officials is not going to be cut. if this drags on into march or april, they will have to do furloughs, is essentially giving people vacations. host: the headline from "the wall street journal." is that one way to do that? guest: that is a painful way to do that. when people do not have money to spend, the economy is not going to grow. if this goes on for a couple of days and the stock market falls dramatically, congress and the white house may be able to avoid some of the long-term consequences. if everybody digs end, more disasters things could take hold. host: the president, vice president, speaker of the house, democratic leader of the house, will be meeting today. from the reporting you have done, what will be happening? guest: they could sit down and cut a deal in five minutes. they know all the issues. they know where their parties are. they could sit down in five minutes, shaking hands,
of the show and they just kind of, we got calls from people from the pentagon and from politicians. both shows were done and conceived without cooperation and without any purported. connection to how they actually run. it was never part of the promises. i've attempted some shows that have not seen the light of day with cooperation of government agencies. i worked for a long time on a show with the f.b.i. and also with nasa, negotiate of which probably not unco--- probably not coins dently came to fruition. but these shows "homeland" -- "24" made up it's own organization c.. the u. to avoid it and with "homeland" it was a step towards reality so it does elude to the cia. but -- >> our relationship with the military was interesting because obviously these agencies want to keep arm's length. and once they became fans -- i think it was that simple, they just enjoyed it and felt this is portraying when we did portray a general or soldier, the military became cooperative. so we had a pentagon lie ace son. it got to the point we said we need a couple of f-16s they said sure. it got great. a lot of pr
especially to are very upset with the cuts that would hit the pentagon. it may be difficult to rally republican votes if they cannot turn off the sequester. on the democratic side, the estate tax could be a problem. the republicans are insisting that the estate tax stay at current levels, which is exempt states up to $5 million. many democrats would like to see -- in january, it is scheduled to come -- it is scheduled to go up dramatically. on states as small as a million dollars would be taxed. most democrats want to see something in the middle. they're adamant that we cannot exempt states as large as $5 million. that could be another sticking point. >> lori montgomery, to expect anything else to go on today? when is the earliest that the senators will come back in for session tomorrow? >> the senate is due back in at 1:00. the house is due at 6:30. the house is the big question mark. it is very difficult to imagine what could pass the house. as for today, it is an excellent question. the senate is not in, the house is not in. my understanding is we're going to have basically everyo
they go to washington, it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part to instruct boeing to build. it is pragmatic. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollarized, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. the 1950's and the 1960's. a period of immense stability very low inflation. universal growth. we had other problems. the lease from the macroeconomic point of view, it was a golden age. why did it end? because the global surplus of recycling mechanism could no longer be sustained. why? because the united states stopped having a surplus by the end of the 1960's. how can you recycle surplus if you cannot have it. enter a young turk in 1971. well, paul volcker -- that name may ring a bell. in 1971, paul volcker was an unknown working for another american. henry kissinger, who you may have heard of. before he became secretary of state. he was still national security advisor. volcker's p
. that became more and more until the publication of "the pentagon papers." that was a gradual growth come a difference, between the media the new york times" and the administration, and that continues until the state. there is an oscillation between the administration and "the times" depending on the administration. that difference opened up cordially there, and it continued to. the skepticism to the vietnam war, and watergate, which is mostly "washington post" storage, increased trade gradually we have what we have today, an adversarial right fox, adversarial left, msnbc, and cnn, which is trying to be "the new york times," when nobody wants to see a non- adversarial. "the times" is a two-section newspaper, a term that "the times" does not like any more. the editor -- when you use in it, they get a little bit squeamish. some of you i should probably it, one of my sources -- took a great deal of reading the, and interviews. "the times" is generous in giving me access, letting the interview them. mostly, i got this through approaching them and asking them, and one led to the other. approa
. by contrast, the international affairs budget is less than one-tenth of the pentagon's. secretary gates has spoken about this and strongly urged the congress to address that imbalance. we have not yet. admiral mullen pointed out, the more diplomacy is cut, the more lives are lost. we have to make certain that we are not penny-wise and pound-foolish when it comes to supporting americas vital overseas interests. adequately funding foreign-policy initiatives is not spending, but investing in our long-term security, and more often or not, it saves far more expensive expenditures in dollars and lives in the conflicts that we fail to see or avoid. we need to invest in america's long-term interest in order to do the job of diplomacy in a dangerous world. this report makes that crystal clear. since 1985, i have had the privilege of making official journeys to one trouble spot or another. i have met a lot of our men and women in the foreign services. we sat and talked about the work they do and the lives that they lead. they spent years learning the languages of the country so they can be on the fro
is a couple mission of the pentagon to it that was a andual i'll live to milan in administration. but it does not interest otters up continually there. this skepticism for the vietnam war and watergate which is mostly the washington post dory increased. the press became adversarial and maybe it will we have to have men ever serial left at have one cnn which is kind of trying to be the new york times and people are talking abut that people are not adversarial news. the stock above the neck down is it to section the newspaper. i notice the public editor who has probably talk to the look less people less times that i have have said, the day's paper is the granddaddy best friend of nuclear plant. the individual was get a little bit squeamish. some of you think i should say where are my sources. the book was a great deal of reading, i also was a very temperance and times of generous and giving me access. as one person or any view and expect to be. 1999-201. . all of the executive editress. by the time we were involved in this process a tentative before -- 1834 was a secondary investing. >> it does
who are very upset with the cuts that would hit the pentagon. it may be difficult to rally republican votes of the cannot turn off the sequester. on the democratic side, the estate tax could be a problem. the republicans are insistent that the estate tax stay at current levels, which is exempting the state of $55 million at a relatively late 35% above that level. many democrats would like to see -- in january it is expected to come -- taxes are expected to go up dramatically. as small as $1 million would be taxed. most democrats want to see something in the metal. they are adamant that we cannot exempt states as large as $5 million. that could be another sticking point. >> do we expect anything going on today? if not, what is the earliest of the senators will come back in for session tomorrow? caller: i think the senate is due back in at 1:00. the house is due at 6:30. the house is the big question mark here. it is very difficult to imagine what could pass the house. as for today, that is an excellent question. the senate is not in here the house is not an. my understanding as we are
they go to washington, it is not an act of philanthropic on the pentagon -- and at the plant for be on the pentagon fell apart -- it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollar rise, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. a period of immense stability very low inflation. universal growth. we had other problems. the lease from the macroeconomic point of view, it was a golden age. why is that? because the global surplus of recycling mechanism was sustained. why? because the united states stopped having a surplus by the end of the 1960's. how can you recycle surplus if you cannot have it. well, paul volcker -- been named may ring a bell. in 1971, paul volcker was an unknown working for another american. henry kissinger, who you may have heard of. before he became secretary of state. volcker's paper, which are when i read a few year
, it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part to instruct boeing to build. -- to build in the deficit areas of the u.s. it is pragmatic. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollarized, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing -- unless those who do not have dollars are given dollars to spend purchasing, the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. the 1950's and the 1960's. a period of immense stability very low inflation. very low unemployment. universal growth. we had other problems. the lease from the macroeconomic point of view, it was a golden age. why did it end? because the global surplus of recycling mechanism could no longer be sustained. why? because the united states stopped having a surplus by the end of the 1960's. how can you recycle surplus if you cannot have it. -- if you do not have it? enter a young turk in 1971. actually, he was the american, but you know what i mean. well, paul volcker -- that name may ring a bell. in 1971, pau
, so do have the debt ceiling fight coming up. when you say that it faces and, you expect the pentagon to say we would just hold everything? certainly years, serving months ahead of time. they have to plan on how many people to have in their workforce -- in the force, recruiting. you cannot turn on a dime, like a huge oil tanker. >> john, we will focus on folks that we did not know who are here. we will come right back. don't go away. take five minutes. >> this is just -- >> we saw senators mccain and 11 decide they will come back in a couple of minutes. as we wait, back to something that took place earlier this morning outside the capital. -- the capitol. >> i want to thank you for being here to call on house republicans not to drop the ball on the middle-class. also for the house to show up for work, right? the president is down at the white house, senator harkin and his colleagues are here. they are out on a paid vacation right now. boehner walked out of the allegations with the present and then he walked out of the house and tell all members to go home while we are four days away f
anyone really believe there is not a single dollar to be saved anywhere in the pentagon? the american people have spoken. they have made it loud and clear they want a balanced approach that casts the wealthiest americans to pay a little bit more. it protect our seniors, children, and our most vulnerable neighbors. the republican leaders refuse to listen. let me say another thing. i would say my republican freshman colleague -- i remember the promises of things you said would change. i would say, you own this now. you have officially become part of the problem, if not the problem. it is a vote against accountability. let me say this, my republican friends have made it on fashionable to worry about the poor and the elderly and the vulnerable. i urge my colleagues not to turn your backs on the most needy. let's balance our budget in a way that does not lower the quality of life or decrease the standard of living. we can do so much better. instead of doing this, you should be negotiating with the president. go back to the negotiating president and stop the game. >> i yield 5 minutes to my
of the attack? this raises questions that the pentagon and the defense department must consider. what greater world the we need the military to play a defense of personnel overseas, especially in the broader middle east that has been never more unsettled? what is the right military posture for forces in the region? what do we need them to do? conversations about the military and defense right now, are mostly about budgets and numbers. it is important to talk more about objectives, strategy, and policies since the attack in benghazi could represent a kind of new normal in our dangerous world. the defense department needs to answer these questions. i might add in the authorization bill we added authorization for 1000 additional marines to be used to protect our installations, diplomatic installations overseas. it is essential for the community to conduct a similar arb-type effort. why did it take more than a week for the eye witnesses' accounts to reach our analysts put these witnesses could have told them in minutes there was no protest at our consulate, a conclusion that in the absence of thi
of state and the new speculation about chuckle over at the pentagon. here are the comments of congressman dingell, the incoming democratic member of the house foreign affairs committee. but there is a huge opposition to the potential nomination of chuckled to become the next secretary of defense, even the president obama has not made his decision. the former senator has come under fire for statements he has made, including one where he referred to the pro-israel lobby as the "jewish lobby." what is your reaction to that remark? >> i think that remark is a troublesome and problematic. it shows that the very best, a lack of sensitivity, and at the very worst, prejudice. i am concerned about the nomination. chuck if has been in the senate for a number of years. there is not only a lot of controversy with that remark, but with some of his boats -- votes. i have been hearing it from what my constituents, mainly in opposition to his nomination. >> you mentioned his boats. there are two sets of things -- he declined to sign some letters in the senate that were related, issues relating to the mid
with the cuts that would hit the pentagon. it may be difficult to rally republican votes if they cannot turn off the sequester. and the democratic side, the estate tax could be a problem. republicans are insisting that the estate tax stay at current .evels, which is exemp many democrats would like to see -- in january, it is scheduled to go up automaticalldramatically. most democrats want to see something in the middle. they are adamant that we cannot exempt states as large as $5 million. >> lori montgomery, do we expect anything going on today, and if not, when is the earliest the senators will come back and recession tomorrow? >> the senate is due back in at 1:00. the house is due in at 6:30. the house is the big question mark here. as for today, it is an excellent question. the senate is not in. the house is not in. my understanding is we're going to have basically everyone working quietly to see if we can reach an agreement co. i will be interesting to see if they give us any information today. >> lori montgomery of the "washington post." find her articles at wp.com. >> both chambers of cong
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)